MSFN is made available via donations, subscriptions and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. Alternatively, register and become a site sponsor/subscriber and ads will be disabled automatically.

OK, instead of continuous editing of posts, this one warrants a new one:
SUCCESS! The problem seems to be in the reg tweaks. Now, I'm quitting testing for today, but I will continue tomorrow, because I still need to distinguish between "built-in" WinNTSetup tweaks (you can see which ones I use in the command line example a few posts back) or the ones I add via the extra reg tweaks folder (driversearch and network discover windows off).
In my wimlib uup esd apply tests I did last week, I used the same tweaks, but I used the "old fashioned" reg method (everything working fine). I know you use a different method (offline reg, can't remember exactly). Now, maybe there's some incompatibilities there?
Oh well, I'm off for today, but I'm glad I'm getting closer step by step...

First of all, Malware Bytes Anti-Malware is not supported with XP x64, Second I want 4 GB on Home Edition version of XP since there's no Home x64 for XP, Windows 7 is my main OS and it's installed on C: Drive And XP is installed on D: Drive all of them are partitions, I'm using a laptop, Asus F83Vf, I downloaded and installed nLite and i downloaded Dibya's 128 GB Patch and intergated it on nLite on a Professional version of XP and i created a third partition G: to Install Professional and i don't want to remove Home Edition because i want to know how to use 4 GB on XP 32-bit so i want to test on Professional first, I want to end up with D: drive with XP x86 installed with 4 GB patch without any problems, My system supports XP. And yes i've got a other laptop which is Toshiba Satellite Pro S300-EZ1511 but with 1 GB of ram, I'm dualbooting Windows 7 Home Premium x64 and XP Home x86.
My Laptop Specs:
Intel Core 2 Duo P8700 2.53GHz ( 2 cores )
4 GB RAM DDR3
NVIDIA GeForce GT 220M 1 GB VRAM DDR2 Dedicated Graphics Card

EDIT: Expected wimgapi for a while, but that also doesn't seem to be it.
Now it seems I have narrowed it down to either the reg tweaks or the unattend.xml. Suspect the first, but am still trying (I will continue this tomorrow).

I removed my previous message, because in my latest tests everything seemed to work OK. But once again, when I tried my "old" (tried and tested) command line, and just tried adding "-ref:*.esd", something is going wrong, and upon reboot, I get a blue screen error ("CONFIG INITIALIZATION FAILED").
Maybe some combination of command line options is causing this...
Normal/ manual setup (selecting esd file "by hand", no extra options) works OK, setup is starting normally. After using the "extended" command line, the same amount of files seems to be applied (5.7gb for x86), so it must be a setting here or there...
q:\winntsetup\WinNTSetup_x86.exe nt6 -source:F:\w10pro-x86-16296-uup\Professional_nl-nl.esd -syspart:c: -unattend:"autounattend_w8.xml" -savedriveletters -sysletter:c -reboot -disableuac -wimindex:3 -DisableHiberBoot -win8noanimation -DisableSystemRestore -DisableSFC -DisableHibernate -BootToDesktop -drivers:L: -regtweaks:"regtweaks-w10" -ref:*.esd
This command line (minus "-ref") has worked perfectly hundreds of times with other w10 versions.
What could be going on?
(none of the settings has caused any problems when I tried manual apply with wimlib, either).

If you would contact me at pionner121 at [biggest search engine mail service] dot com I would gladly host all the updates on my webserver for everyone to use them.
I could also create autoinstaller for them.

I'm probably not the best guy to instruct a beginner how to install XP x86 in a non-standard location using a patch to access more than the standard amount of memory - it's been too many years. But I can ask some basic questions about how and why you find yourself in this situation. @jaclaz and @dencorso both tried to get you to provide more information, which you declined to do, so I'll spell out some specific questions. You need to answer ALL questions asked so that whoever does help you has the information they need.
It seems that XP is not your only OS, (apparently Win 7 x64 as well?), and you said earlier that you installed XP on D: so:
1) Mainly out of curiosity, but it might help - Why do you want to use XP x86, and why don't you want to use XP x64? Nothing wrong with either OS, but if we understood your motivations we might be able to better explain your options.
2) Are you trying to end up with XP x86 as the only OS on this computer, or are you wanting to dual boot between XP x86 and another OS, and if so, which OS?
3) Explain your overall system setup, ie Is this a laptop or desktop? Are C:, D:, etc separate drives or partitions or what?
4) Explain what is currently on C:, D:, and any other drive in your system.
5) Explain what you want to end up with on C:, D:, and any other drive in your system.
6) Explain how, EXACTLY, you attempted to install XP x86.
Once we have the answers to the above, then we should have enough information to begin to help you. Good luck!
Cheers and Regards
PS - in a normal installation where XP x86 is the only OS installed on a system with only a single drive, boot.ini is a hidden system file on the root of the drive, ie C:\boot.ini. The answers to the above questions might help clarify whether it should still be there or in a different location.

Oh no I realize that. I just wanted to see if I could clean it completely.
To me, even though 1.46 GB is perhaps piddly, I still think like the rich millionaire who still realizes the worth of a dollar. Every gigabyte counts.

Okay, i just want to access my boot.ini and view it and i need a file explorer to boot from a usb, i tried rebuilding it on XP installation disc, but doesn't help, i set the OS name to Windows XP Professional and OS Load options : /fastdetect, even though i'm not a computer professional i'm a noob
( one last thing how can i view my boot.ini without using any tool but the XP recovery console or maybe i need a file explorer to boot from usb )

The IPv6 protocol support update for Win2000 has been removed from MS site but can be found in Web Archive:
http://web.archive.org/web/20070129075223/http://download.microsoft.com/download/4/b/a/4ba76461-31be-49df-a2c6-7d0ee318d1e9/tpipv6-001205.exe
Also, I wonder whether you include the fix for the 4 GB memory limit (which can be removed with changing 1 byte).

Sorry but could someone better explain what these instructions mean?
OldNewExplorer can override UIFILES from most files loaded by explorer.exe.
To take advantage of this, add UIFILES to your ShellStyle.dll named the following way:
Example:
SHELL32.DLL UIFILE 23 -> SHELLSTYLE.DLL SHELL32_UIFILE 23
EXPLORERFRAME.DLL UIFILE 20482 -> SHELLSTYLE.DLL EXPLORERFRAME_UIFILE 20482
and,
WARNING: custom resource types are not loaded from ShellStyle.dll if it has MUI resource pair.
Merge it with mui file and remove MUI resource.
Thanks.

It's been good, though I have noticed the last couple of moths security-only rollups; they required me to run SFC first, to be able to install the updates. I guess they don't like the Windows Mail files from Vista.

i gave up trying to collect all 98SE updates, yet alone want to install all of them individually, restart the system, and so on. i use the unofficial service pack instead and through a certain update process that works fine, quicker and offers better compatibility / performance. however, i still install each individual update on my windows 95 osr 2.5 systems, except for of course stuff like the unofficial usb update, etc. my windows 95 update folder contains more than 105 updates and at least 55 MB of space, i know there may be a few updates i still dont have but i never went back to search which ones i may not have, although there was some guy recently who posted a link in msfn of w95 update history, so i may use that in the future if needed.

Offhand, I'd suggest getting a command prompt using your XP installation disc and accessing boot.ini from there. You could also either plug the disk drive into another computer so you could access it, or boot into another OS off a DVD or USB drive, (either a version of Linux or one of the various "rescue" OS that are available), which is the same idea as using the XP installation disc. Or, you might be able to repair your boot.ini file -- this might help -- which also uses the XP installation disc.
Cheers and Regards

There are some applications that shouldn't, couldn't and wouldn't be running on small size/high PPI monitors. Unless they will become smart enough to auto-render and auto-resize ALL the controls on EVERY kind of display, apps like Photoshop, Premier Pro and all other media oriented software won't be small-screen-friendly. However, web browsers, instant messaging apps, some games, media content viewers are less big-screen-friendly. (I tried only once to read a plain text mail on a 24" 4K display without DPI scaling, I wouldn't recommend doing like that).
On that side, DPI scaling in Win10 is one of the less crappy thing that has got implemented, even if software developers are going to wait for adding OS-controlled scaling features.
P.S.: Previous OSes also got DPI scaling, but don't you remember that ugly font resize with no ClearType resizing?

They've been "dumbing down" windows - whether for touch use or just because the poor dear users get cognitive overload if there are more than 5 things on the screen - since way back. Many of us reconfigured those things to maximize working area and minimize fluff.
The difference is that now the configurable parts for geeks / power users have just been made unavailable.
They've lately focused on making it important that UI elements can move themselves around depending on what kind of screen you have (tiny phone screen in portrait orientation to massive multi-4K monitor setups). They forgot to consider that you just can't do the same things on both of those systems.
LOL, I am looking over my big Photoshop workspace - 14 panels, each of which has tabs, plastered across 3 monitors - and imagining that if that were all shrunk down to, say, a 480 x 750 pixel desktop on a tablet App, what would actually be possible...
-Noel